On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 11:17, John M. Harris Jr <johnmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I must disagree. That it "works" in RHEL doesn't mean that it should be done
> in Fedora. The current situation in Fedora, where maven and ant have been
> "moved" to modules has screwed over the Eclipse packagers, for example, and
> more are to follow.
> I must disagree. That it "works" in RHEL doesn't mean that it should be done
> in Fedora. The current situation in Fedora, where maven and ant have been
> "moved" to modules has screwed over the Eclipse packagers, for example, and
> more are to follow.
>
I'm flattered that you think there is more than one Eclipse packager these days, but it is not my perception that choices made by the maven and ant maintainer has screwed over Eclipse.
From my PoV the problem is that Ursa Prime née Major has been coming Real Soon Now™ for years to obviate the build issues but it just never materialised. This is why the Eclipse stack has gotten into a bit of a pickle -- I waited far too long with far too much naive optimism before modularising and I'm sad to say that not modularising Eclipse sooner has done a great disservice to users.
TBH as a desktop application, I see a brighter future in Flatpak for Eclipse and maybe when our Flatpak distribution is mature enough, we can eventually stop shipping RPMs altogether....
_______________________________________________ java-devel mailing list -- java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to java-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
